Hot News, Military

House Armed Services chairman blasts Obama for military pay cut

1 10


Well this just simply cannot be true…right?  After all, President Obama and his sidekick Michelle have told us over the last eight years that they are big supporters of the military and military families…right?  Uh huh…

Let’s get it right folks!  Washington D.C. doesn’t give a crap about the people, the warriors, who fight to defend this country…nor do they give a crap about those who already fought to defend this country!  Why?  Because they see all of these warriors as just a “drain on their personal agenda budgets”!  That’s right!  Pay for the military salaries, healthcare, retirement, etc. is something they continue to cut, every year, to increase the dollars in the buckets of “those other things they want”!  And let’s not forget, National Security, defense of our country, is the only true, constitutional mandate of the federal government!

Mass change in the nation’s capital is the only way that we are going to get back on the path of greatness!  Term limits in every aspect of the federal government needs to be put in place!  Career politics was never at the forefront of the Founding Fathers’ minds!

Go Don…We have nothing to lose!


The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee blasted President Obama Thursday evening for undercutting members of the military by suggesting a 1.6 percent annual pay raise, which falls below the 2.1 percent figure mandated by law.

Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, said federal workers and the military have historically received 2 to 3 percent raises, but the Obama administration has cut those annual bumps in recent years.

“Few people are more deserving of a full pay raise than our men and women in uniform,” Thornberry said. “Yet, at the same time President Obama is proposing significant increases in military deployments and expanding existing missions, he is cutting the pay raise for our troops for the fourth year in a row.”

Thornberry pointed at the House-passed National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2017, which mandates the 2.1 percent increase and would block the president’s ability to reduce troop pay in the future.

He said that giving military individuals and families only a 1.6 percent bump would hurt them in the long haul.

“The lower pay increase mandated by the president means a young military family would receive about $336 less this year than the law provides. Over four years of a lower rate, the family will have lost between $1,500 and $2,000,” Thornberry said.

Obama informed House Speaker Paul Ryan on Wednesday of his plan to propose a 1 percent increase in federal workers’ base pay. He added he would later decide on the exact pay increases for localities, but said it would not exceed 0.6 percent.

Federal workers have previously been given 2 or 3 percent annual raises.


About the author / 


1 Comment

  1. Angus Rangus September 2, 2016 at 9:09 AM -  Reply


    … the “cola formula” for my Social Security did not provide ANY increase last year…

    … whilst my wife’s public teacher FL Retirement System gave her an auto-majic 2.6% a year — she fell in the ‘grandfathering formula’ of eventually eliminating the 3% our Teachers newly reformed FRS …

    How does one ‘equalize’ Military from other Federal Employees/Retirees??

    YOU DON’T!! The idea our Military is ‘special’ and should be treated separately is just more DC TO BOSTON MEDIA VALUES total crapola!!

    The only way to ‘equalize’ is to EQUALIZE!!

    Eliminate the VA… privatize all existing 131 VA hospitals and their cluster of clinics!!
    Those providing excellent service can only be made better with private ownership … and ZERO FEd GOVT involvment!!

    Allow our Military active/retirees to enroll on the same kiosks as Federal Employees for ‘any approved plan’… at 100% we promised and same for dependents we currently do!! {Fed Employees/retirees get 75%…}

    VOILA… we just ‘equalized’ in the delivery and ‘honored’ our commitment to our Military…

    …. Which The DONALD has promised will soon be “larger than ever”…

    … does “larger than ever” mean larger than the 3.5 million Dick Nixon reduced following our venerable Peace With Honor in 1972…

    … or somewhere back to the 2.4 million we had when Bush 41 managed the Berlin Wall takedown??

    How about 1.8 million as the near term goal… just by eliminating many of the civilian contractors required for routine mission accomplishment today??

    Did America suffer when we had 400,000 in Germany or 85,000 in South Korea for 50 years??

    How long ya’ thank to do the same for Iraq and Afghanistan??

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *